| [PATCH][UNIX] Move the unix sock iterators in to proper place [message #23696] |
Thu, 22 November 2007 13:22  |
Pavel Emelianov
Messages: 1149
Registered: September 2006
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The first_unix_socket() and next_unix_sockets() are now used
in proc file and in forall_unix_socets macro only.
The forall_unix_sockets is not used in this file at all so
remove it. After this move the helpers to where they really
belong, i.e. closer to proc code under the #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
option.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
---
diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
index 6be6d87..b62a271 100644
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@ -127,32 +127,6 @@ static atomic_t unix_nr_socks = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
#define UNIX_ABSTRACT(sk) (unix_sk(sk)->addr->hash != UNIX_HASH_SIZE)
-static struct sock *first_unix_socket(int *i)
-{
- for (*i = 0; *i <= UNIX_HASH_SIZE; (*i)++) {
- if (!hlist_empty(&unix_socket_table[*i]))
- return __sk_head(&unix_socket_table[*i]);
- }
- return NULL;
-}
-
-static struct sock *next_unix_socket(int *i, struct sock *s)
-{
- struct sock *next = sk_next(s);
- /* More in this chain? */
- if (next)
- return next;
- /* Look for next non-empty chain. */
- for ((*i)++; *i <= UNIX_HASH_SIZE; (*i)++) {
- if (!hlist_empty(&unix_socket_table[*i]))
- return __sk_head(&unix_socket_table[*i]);
- }
- return NULL;
-}
-
-#define forall_unix_sockets(i, s) \
- for (s = first_unix_socket(&(i)); s; s = next_unix_socket(&(i),(s)))
-
#ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY_NETWORK
static void unix_get_secdata(struct scm_cookie *scm, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
@@ -2010,6 +1984,29 @@ static unsigned int unix_poll(struct file * file, struct socket *sock, poll_tabl
#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
+static struct sock *first_unix_socket(int *i)
+{
+ for (*i = 0; *i <= UNIX_HASH_SIZE; (*i)++) {
+ if (!hlist_empty(&unix_socket_table[*i]))
+ return __sk_head(&unix_socket_table[*i]);
+ }
+ return NULL;
+}
+
+static struct sock *next_unix_socket(int *i, struct sock *s)
+{
+ struct sock *next = sk_next(s);
+ /* More in this chain? */
+ if (next)
+ return next;
+ /* Look for next non-empty chain. */
+ for ((*i)++; *i <= UNIX_HASH_SIZE; (*i)++) {
+ if (!hlist_empty(&unix_socket_table[*i]))
+ return __sk_head(&unix_socket_table[*i]);
+ }
+ return NULL;
+}
+
struct unix_iter_state {
struct seq_net_private p;
int i;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: [PATCH][UNIX] Move the unix sock iterators in to proper place [message #23723 is a reply to message #23720] |
Fri, 23 November 2007 13:37  |
Herbert Xu
Messages: 45
Registered: April 2007
|
Member |
|
|
On Fri, Nov 23, 2007 at 04:10:08PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
> I'm afraid to become importunate, but is the net-2.6 (not 25)
> tree is currently the David's tree (unlike net-2.6.25, which
> has temporary switched to your one)?
I'm about to do a push soon which will create net-2.6 in the
same place as my net-2.6.25 tree.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
|
|
|
|
OpenVZ Forum
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
